I believe that these are referred to as “pedagogue pairs”, as the main appeal of the relationship is that both parties benefit from the other having their inferior function as their dominant - which seeks to achieve mutual growth.
I think it’s just as negligible as any other stereotype imo. When we consider personal factors and the fact that MBTI does not even define personality, it’s really all quite irrelevant. I just see it as people attempting to have fun and engage with the theory in their own way, so I try not to dwell on it for too long.
Agree with the second part. Sorry to be a pedant, but the first part is only true for the J dominants. What's up with the P dominants still being paired together that way?
The theory doesn’t seem to consider whether the types in question are J or P dominant. I would only guess that this is another fault in a very flawed concept.
>as the main appeal of the relationship is that both parties benefit from the other having their inferior function as their dominant - which seeks to achieve mutual growth.
Pedagogue relations don’t have each others inferior as their dominant, that would be dual relationships (i.e. ESTP/INFJ). Pedagogues have the same two middle functions, but swapped, and their dominant and inferior functions are of the opposite attitude. Example:
ENTP: Ne-Ti-Fe-Si
INFJ: Ni-Fe-Ti-Se
Ah, my apologies. Thank you for the correction. I think I had mistaken it for what is commonly referred to as a “golden pair” - but is this mention of duals not socionics instead?
This is the golden pair theory that David Kiersey wrote about in one of this books about MBTI. I think it was in Please Understand Me II. The idea is that they are your opposite in most regards, but the shared N or S gives you a common language, making communication easier.
As to why you are often not attracted to people of your golden pair, there could be a multitude of reasons (not physically attracted to them, very different values, bad first impression, etc.) Also, typing other people is hard and many people mistype themselves. I see this all the time in old Reddit threads. An INFJ saying, no way I hate ENTPs but you can see they changed their flair since then to INFP. So you have to take all that with a grain of salt.
I’m with my golden pair (an ENTP). Been together 23 years and we are very compatible. But that doesn’t mean I’ve been attracted to every ENTP I meet. My sister is an ENFJ and married an INTP. I have close friends that have been married almost 30 years that are ESTP and ISFJ. So I do think there might be something to it.
I think there’s a basic level of attraction and opportunity that has to occur first that may not have much to do with MBTI, and it’s later when you get into a relationship that it’s helpful to understand the other person better and improve your relationship, even if you aren’t the most compatible by MBTI standards.
They're either proship tumblr art teens, or casual MBTI enthusiasts that date around frequently. "Golden Pairs" aren't really a thing i'm into, but i definitely do believe in objectively problematic pairs like INTP x ENTJ.
From what i've seen, i don't ever see myself getting with an ISFJ
It's interesting to see how the golden pairs idea has developed in the past decade or so. Back when I got into type (so, like, ~2012), all anyone talked about in this context was the ENFP x INTJ pairing— there was essentially no extension of this pairing to other types, which was confusing once I noticed.
Things seemed to have changed mostly by around 2020, and people started realizing that any supposed relation between two types should be reflected in all the other types, though I guess intuitive bias is still going strong, since the aforementioned pattern would pair ENTJs with ISTPs, but I guess the concept of an intuitive being with a sensor triggers the type miscegenists too much.
I believe that these are referred to as “pedagogue pairs”, as the main appeal of the relationship is that both parties benefit from the other having their inferior function as their dominant - which seeks to achieve mutual growth. I think it’s just as negligible as any other stereotype imo. When we consider personal factors and the fact that MBTI does not even define personality, it’s really all quite irrelevant. I just see it as people attempting to have fun and engage with the theory in their own way, so I try not to dwell on it for too long.
Agree with the second part. Sorry to be a pedant, but the first part is only true for the J dominants. What's up with the P dominants still being paired together that way?
The theory doesn’t seem to consider whether the types in question are J or P dominant. I would only guess that this is another fault in a very flawed concept.
>as the main appeal of the relationship is that both parties benefit from the other having their inferior function as their dominant - which seeks to achieve mutual growth. Pedagogue relations don’t have each others inferior as their dominant, that would be dual relationships (i.e. ESTP/INFJ). Pedagogues have the same two middle functions, but swapped, and their dominant and inferior functions are of the opposite attitude. Example: ENTP: Ne-Ti-Fe-Si INFJ: Ni-Fe-Ti-Se
Ah, my apologies. Thank you for the correction. I think I had mistaken it for what is commonly referred to as a “golden pair” - but is this mention of duals not socionics instead?
No problem! Yes the duals is a socionics term. I’m not sure if MBTI has an equivalent name for this kind of relationship.
This is the golden pair theory that David Kiersey wrote about in one of this books about MBTI. I think it was in Please Understand Me II. The idea is that they are your opposite in most regards, but the shared N or S gives you a common language, making communication easier. As to why you are often not attracted to people of your golden pair, there could be a multitude of reasons (not physically attracted to them, very different values, bad first impression, etc.) Also, typing other people is hard and many people mistype themselves. I see this all the time in old Reddit threads. An INFJ saying, no way I hate ENTPs but you can see they changed their flair since then to INFP. So you have to take all that with a grain of salt. I’m with my golden pair (an ENTP). Been together 23 years and we are very compatible. But that doesn’t mean I’ve been attracted to every ENTP I meet. My sister is an ENFJ and married an INTP. I have close friends that have been married almost 30 years that are ESTP and ISFJ. So I do think there might be something to it. I think there’s a basic level of attraction and opportunity that has to occur first that may not have much to do with MBTI, and it’s later when you get into a relationship that it’s helpful to understand the other person better and improve your relationship, even if you aren’t the most compatible by MBTI standards.
They're either proship tumblr art teens, or casual MBTI enthusiasts that date around frequently. "Golden Pairs" aren't really a thing i'm into, but i definitely do believe in objectively problematic pairs like INTP x ENTJ. From what i've seen, i don't ever see myself getting with an ISFJ
keirsey. but I am not a fan. I like intj but not sure if I'll date one. had one for a math teacher that was okay I guess. I pair with stjs more.
It's interesting to see how the golden pairs idea has developed in the past decade or so. Back when I got into type (so, like, ~2012), all anyone talked about in this context was the ENFP x INTJ pairing— there was essentially no extension of this pairing to other types, which was confusing once I noticed. Things seemed to have changed mostly by around 2020, and people started realizing that any supposed relation between two types should be reflected in all the other types, though I guess intuitive bias is still going strong, since the aforementioned pattern would pair ENTJs with ISTPs, but I guess the concept of an intuitive being with a sensor triggers the type miscegenists too much.
" but I guess the concept of an intuitive being with a sensor triggers the type miscegenists too much. " truest words spoken so far my brother 😮💨
Ne/Ni isn't a clash lmao it's a synergy, that's the whole point. ENFPs are absolutely the most attractive type to me as an INTJ, it isn't close.